Zero Punctuation: The Last of Us

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

The Dubya:

Agreed with the both of you.

Hell he DOES seem to talk more about Naughty Dog/Uncharted/the zombie trope in general more than the actual game.

I GUESS maybe the enemies seem "dehumanized" if that's what he means, but how is that any different than Booker Dewitt mowing down literally thousands of soldiers with smug apathy (that came from an otherwise peaceful Columbia) in Bioshock Infinite or, ya know, EVERY other shoot em up game in the history of gaming?
Snip
I mean, I don't understand what people want here. It's The Road all over again; EVERYTHING and EVERYONE is fucked, so even if you wanted to be Mr. Superhero, you pretty much HAVE to take a "Fuck You Got Mine" approach if you feel like surviving another day. Hell even one of the characters, Bill, addresses that very idea as to why he travels alone in one of the cutscenes. Joel can't bring himself to go AS far off the rails as his friend has, so to me Joel still seems like a relatively decent dude so far. Again, it's the end of human civilization as we once knew it. There aren't going to be many Mother Teresas or Ghandis running around anymore.

I've only recently met with the Bill character

Snip

You are 1/4 through the game and you seem to have a better grasp of the world building and themes of the last of us then Yahtzee.
Notice how the first few non infected humans to be killed in cutscenes are not by Joel. TLOU is introducing you to this violent kill or be killed 'the road' style world. They got other NPC's to do first few on screen executions so it wouldn't cause such a disconnect between you and Joel.

3 people had been executed before you get to kill your first human goon with Joel yourself.

The hypocrisy of criticising TLOU which fully addresses violence with world building, character development, tailored combat mechanics yet giving Bioshock:Infinite a free pass because 'Booker' has a violent past....so let's shoot everyone in the face FPS style

You're not far into TLOU, you have not experience much of what the game has to offer...stay off the forums and play it!

Zachary Amaranth:

MB202:
I think Pop Culture keeps dodging around the term "zombie" because most people, myself included, are getting sick of zombies being everywhere.

Evens straight up zombie movies rarely use the word zombie, though. This goes way back, to boot.

Honestly, I'm more sick of the concept than the diction anyway.

People think not using the word will make them less derivative.

From what I can tell, responses to this review seem pretty... split. I haven't played this game, so I just enjoy Yahtzee's commentary.

Personally, I've never been a fan of zombies - mainly because they terrify me. Yes, "spore-based" zombies is a nice change of pace, but when you get right down to it, they're still zombies.

And since this is so conveniently fitting: http://www.toplessrobot.com/2013/07/9_reasons_the_zombie_fad_must_die.php

I was seriously planning on getting a ps3 just to play this game
but now i'm not going to.

I got into a massive argument after the E3 2012 gameplay demo

i hated how after an apocalypse everyone just starts killing everone else for no real reason

As the man says now these less of us surely the value of human life should have gone up. I mean if everyone i ever cared about was dead i'd do everything i could to avoid more pointless death.
Yes people would be angry and hate filled but at the ones who took there loved-ones away. The clickers not the humans (don't want to get into that)

So yes great review saved me a lot of heartache and 160

Phuctifyno:

I haven't played the game, so I don't have much informing the inquiry, but I'm curious: Did you get to choose? If not, wouldn't that have been more interesting and a better use of the medium?

This is a character driven story. You are not roleplaying, you do not make any choices you just experience it. A choice at the end would of altered the entire point of the story, about what motivates Joel and redemption style thing that happened at the end.

'spec ops: the line' is similar but it did do something very interesting. It gave you a few fake choices throughout. It was not a roleplaying game but it made you consider what was right/wrong, the difficulty of decisions that Konrad has to make. But in the game Konrad mirrored the Player. There was some strange parallel thing going on.
You make a final choice at the end about how you feel about everything that transpired.

I'm not sure if this would of worked for the Last of Us. There's a lot of people discussing the cure at the end at weather it would of worked. I feel this is missing the point..even if it was 100%, Joel decided to save Ellie based on a mixture of love and the selfish survival instincts that are a theme throughout the entire game. -You meet 6 couples ranging from brothers, lovers, friends, spouses - so it's a consistent theme throughout. Allowing someone who 'doesn't get' the story to choose might not work.

gjkbgt:

i hated how after an apocalypse everyone just starts killing everone else for no real reason

The game explains it well. Just like 'The walking dead' tv show, 'the Road', 'Mad max' etc etc.

If you can't fathom why the world will become chaotic after the collapse of Law & order then I guess this story will annoy you

IronMit:

You are 1/4 through the game and you seem to have a better grasp of the world building and themes of the last of us then Yahtzee.
Notice how the first few non infected humans to be killed in cutscenes are not by Joel. TLOU is introducing you to this violent kill or be killed 'the road' style world. They got other NPC's to do first few on screen executions so it wouldn't cause such a disconnect between you and Joel.

3 people had been executed before you get to kill your first human goon with Joel yourself.

The hypocrisy of criticising TLOU which fully addresses violence with world building, character development, tailored combat mechanics yet giving Bioshock:Infinite a free pass because 'Booker' has a violent past....so let's shoot everyone in the face FPS style

Your not far into TLOU, you have not experience much of what the game has to offer...stay off the forums and play it!

LOL yeah, TLOU is one of the few games I'm considering actually putting down money to buy for myself. I don't do that very often with games; usually I test em out first on Redbox to see if I'd be able to enjoy it for a sustained period of time, and so far I'm REALLY digging it. Is it the most groundbreaking twisty-turny story plotwise in the history of the world? I suppose not. ButI can forgive movies/games/shows/etc. that may have familiar or simplistic storylines if the presentation and execution of what this game is offering me is top notch. And to me, it definately is. The characters are great, the voice-acting is phenomenal all around, (yeah you kinda saw the ending of the intro coming, but holy FUCK that voice actress sold it so well that it was still a gutpunch), the atmosphere has been legitimately terrifying on multiple occasions, and the gameplay (which is the most important part) still feels fresh and challenging with each new encounter. It feels like a new puzzle for me to solve. In BSI, there was really nothing else to do BUT mow down 20+ dudes and some machine gun robots at a time over and over again. Here there's more opportunity for me to use my noggin and stratigize who to take out and when or if I even SHOULD combat them and just run right on by them. Kinda like Deus Ex: HR except you don't have all the cybernetic enhancements...well unless you count the "Enhanced Hearing" thing that Joel possesses. That seems a bit silly in concept...but I'd be lying if I didn't say it wasn't hella useful!

Anyways, lemmie just go and buy this dang game already :P

gjkbgt:

i hated how after an apocalypse everyone just starts killing everone else for no real reason

As the man says now these less of us surely the value of human life should have gone up.

That's kind of the point. This is billed as a zombie game; however, the real enemies in The Last of Us are other humans (a character even remarks on this theme explicitly). The game is trying to convey to the player how easily humanity degrades in the face of a great threat. Very few people care about the greater good or the survival of humanity as a whole; everyone just wants to survive and do what's best for themselves.

Joel does the same thing; he act selfishly, because otherwise he and the people he loves would die. The ending, especially, plays into this theme.

Basically, saying that Joel is a bad person or the people in the game are unsympathetic is kind of missing the point. The game repeatedly reinforces the moral grayness of the characters. We're not supposed to sympathize with them necessarily, or think they're heroes.

I figured the title "The Last of Us" refers to the final remaining fragments of Ellie and Joel's humanity. So "the last of us," as in the last pieces of who we were, rather than the last of humanity itself.

...at least, that's how I see it.

Historyism:

gjkbgt:

i hated how after an apocalypse everyone just starts killing everone else for no real reason

That's kind of the point. This is billed as a zombie game; however, the real enemies in The Last of Us are other humans (a character even remarks on this theme explicitly). The game is trying to convey to the player how easily humanity degrades in the face of a great threat. Very few people care about the greater good or the survival of humanity as a whole; everyone just wants to survive and do what's best for themselves.

Joel does the same thing; he act selfishly, because otherwise he and the people he loves would die. The ending, especially, plays into this theme.

Basically, saying that Joel is a bad person or the people in the game are unsympathetic is kind of missing the point. The game repeatedly reinforces the moral grayness of the characters. We're not supposed to sympathize with them necessarily, or think they're heroes.

Or I guess to put it another way let's turn to this exchange between Kotaku's Kirk Hamilton and Creative Director Neil Druckmann regarding the character of Joel:

"Is that how you saw him, as a monster?"

"I mean, a sympathetic monster, but sure! He did monstrous things!"

"Yeah. But who didn't in this world?"

This'll be my first post ever here.

I can understand some of the gripes Yahtzee had. The overdone and post-apocalyptic "zombie" setting? Sure. The generally useless and invincible companion AI? Alright. The uselessness of certain game-mechanics like Smoke Bombs? Yeah, they are very situational.

HOWEVER;

1. Why the fuck does he talk about Uncharted for such a considerable part of the video? Is it that hard to judge a game on its own merit? Overall I had the feeling Yahtzee came in and reviewed it like it was Uncharted 4: Post-apocalyption. Which does a disservice to both the game and his reviewer credentials.
2. Why is he complaining about moral ambiguity of its main characters? The fact that Joel did some shifty shit during the 20 years is heavily implied even as Chapter 2 begins. This is only more touched upon in his interactions with Tess (the casual shooting of Robert, "shitty people"), him referring to be on both sides of highway bandit encounters, his mano-a-mano with his brother and explicitly shown in the few instances he's seperated from Ellie. Why does Yahtzee feel they need to be punished for their actions (even when they were arguably justified)? Was The Godfather's* ending bad because Michael Corleone didn't get jailed for his actions? To touch upon my first critique, maybe it's because he was assuming Joel to be Nathan Drake V2.0, imbued with all his generic heroic male charm, but still...
3. Could he at least not acknowledge TLOU did some things right? I particularly liked the fact that I could run (or more accurately; sneak) past several encounters, as I did with one particular Bloater encounter. The fact that Joel isn't a walking tank and actively has to scavenge to save his life was also quite refreshing.

Maybe it's just that Naughty Dog is his antithesis of Valve, where the former can't do anything right and the latter single-handedly (re-)invents and popularises all of its features (like in Fuse's review and that asinine implication that Valve and L4D are the sole reason for the popularity of 4P co-op).
For people arguing that the setting is overdone and therefore the game doesn't warrant its reviews/popularity: fine, you are entitled to your opinion. But just remember that every word, setting and situation has already been written, but that doesn't mean there can't be any more good books.

Alright, back to lurking quietly for me.

*: I do not necessarily think TLOU and the Godfather share the same pedestal, I just highlighted it because it was a prime example of unheroic main character. Personally, TLOU rates a solid 8.5 to 9/10 for me. A bit too slow at times and unpleasant at times (but maybe that was the point?) and the bat hearing mechanic was kinda weird.

IronMit:
snip

Historyism:
[quote="gjkbgt" post="6.820801.19818420"] This is exactly my point

I hate that!

The whole everyone is really just a psychopath forced to not murder by society this is utter ball-shit
Human didn't always have society, we only invented that about 5000 years ago.

So what you think before then every random encounter ended in murder?

And yes we all (99%) would kill rather then be killed but we'd be unset about it and try not to do it again.

I mean even the wild west didn't have a murder rate all that high, (about the same as some of the worse mexican drug war cartel towns now)

So those messages always fall flat for me

Proverbial Jon:
snip

My interpretation of the title - massive spoilers!

Did not care for this game either. The story really just made me go WTF??? You mean to tell me that in 20 years you could not find or build a better knife? Hell use fucking rebar from one of the THOUSANDS of collapsed buildings. Hell build a spear out of the shit and keep the infected at arms length. Like these.... (Spoilered for size)

And you think after TWENTY YEARS Joel would be able to do more than 2 take-downs... He should be a hardened combat vet who should have a whole bag of moves to pick from.

And about the ending

I'm happy to see a more balanced opinion on this game, what with it and BioShock: Infinite being among the best games evar!!

Yahtzee's voice has also increased in speed which really helped me enjoy the episode, reminded me of erm... 2011 episodes?

Overall, I agreed with some points he made, like with the friendly AI and smoke bombs, but some of his points were misguided. In some cases, specially the beginning, I can see how his point about human life having more value in a post-apocalyptic scenario should hold more value, but does not.

I feel like this game doesn't really have enough to call itself a "Game". Call me dumb, stupid, whatever you want, but that's how it felt to me. It feels like they focused a lot on story, dialogue, cutscenes, so on and so forth, and it was fantastic to listen and watch no doubt, but it didn't make it a game. The gameplay was there to give the player something to do to reach the next part of the story (and in my case, some things broke up the gameplay, but I let that slide). 4 Types of enemies, 2 different approaches (Stealth and Action), and the action only had a few different methods (cover and gun, smoke bomb and melee, or just run?). I don't consider moving trash cans and ladders to the right location "puzzles", but to each his own. Good game, but I feel it would've sacrificed a lot less feel and immersion if it was a movie or TV series. It was... a "Cinematic experience"?

gjkbgt:

The whole everyone is really just a psychopath forced to not murder by society this is utter ball-shit
Human didn't always have society, we only invented that about 5000 years ago.

So what you think before then every random encounter ended in murder?

Also, don't play Fallout 3.
the wild west still had Sheriff's and some sort of law and order.
At Hounslow Heath in the UK. There were highwaymen there causing havock back in the day, there is not crime on that scale now.
If you have read Game of Thrones - As soon as the war started it became difficult to rule and bandits and criminals went around raping, stealing, burning and killing.

Don't think of it as a black and white thing, if criminals can get away with crime they will do it. The more lax the law is the more crazy everything becomes.
Eventually after so many years someone will become pretty powerful and create a system to keep order.
A lot of media tries to cover this; the prison in prison break season 3, Legion in fallout new vegas, that bad guy town in book of Eli. They base it on history. Not a histroian so I can't give you other examples.

You can look and riots, in London, birmingham etc when police lose control even more people go crazy because they can get away with it

gjkbgt:

IronMit:
snip

Historyism:
[quote="gjkbgt" post="6.820801.19818420"] This is exactly my point

I hate that!

The whole everyone is really just a psychopath forced to not murder by society this is utter ball-shit
Human didn't always have society, we only invented that about 5000 years ago.

So what you think before then every random encounter ended in murder?

And yes we all (99%) would kill rather then be killed but we'd be unset about it and try not to do it again.

I mean even the wild west didn't have a murder rate all that high, (about the same as some of the worse mexican drug war cartel towns now)

So those messages always fall flat for me

Eh, the setting's pretty standard for the post-apocalyptic wasteland genre.

I don't think anyone in the game murders for fun; it's just that everyone's looking out for his or her own safety. Joel doesn't ever look for conflict, but he defends himself and Ellie against raiders and cannibals and stuff. I thought the game did a pretty good job of making the kills seem desperate and necessary. And of course, this type of fall-of-society setting is going to make people feel like it's the end of the world, and everything goes.

YMMV, of course.

For what it's worth, I think this game is excellent, and worth playing just for the relationship between the characters, which I really liked. I thought everyone had great emotional depth. Again, YYMMV.

gjkbgt:

IronMit:
snip

Historyism:
[quote="gjkbgt" post="6.820801.19818420"] This is exactly my point

I hate that!

The whole everyone is really just a psychopath forced to not murder by society this is utter ball-shit
Human didn't always have society, we only invented that about 5000 years ago.

So what you think before then every random encounter ended in murder?

And yes we all (99%) would kill rather then be killed but we'd be unset about it and try not to do it again.

I mean even the wild west didn't have a murder rate all that high, (about the same as some of the worse mexican drug war cartel towns now)

So those messages always fall flat for me

Not every random encounter in the Last of Us's setting ends in murder. It's just not uncommon.

Trying not to do it again may be a bit tricky in a horrible kill or be killed world in which not doing it again isn't really a feasible option. And upset if we hadn't already gotten used to it, which can, does, and has happened.

People living in the wild west didn't have to deal with a worldwide zombie creating plague or a general collapse of human civilization.

And it's not that humans are forced not to murder by society. Humans have both positive and negative tendencies. But if society collapses the negative tendencies can be given a good environment in which to emerge and thrive. This can vary depend on how bad the exact situation is. And in the setting of The Last of Us it is very, very, bad. Far worse than the wild west or mexican drug war cartel towns.

Legion:

Lvl 64 Klutz:

Legion:

The rest of it I couldn't agree with less. It seemed like complaining for the sake of it and/or deliberately missing the point.

New to Zero Punctuation? That tends to be Yahtzee's thing... taking the piss out of games even if they are generally good.

Normally he seems to try and be humorous about it while being comically over the top, with this it just seems to be a mild rant. Usually even if I disagree with him I can find the humour in it, in this case it felt like somebody just complaining, like in a "Why does everybody love The Last of Us?" thread.

This really is a pathetic review. If he really wanted to make legitimate complaints about the game there are only 3 real issues, the Ellie AI (which he covered) and the two instances of foul play by Naughty Dog being the use of Ellen Page's likeness and the use of a reconstructed transportation map apparently taken from some guys blog. Also, almost half of the review was complaining about the Uncharted series rather than the real focus.

Sorry Mr. Croshaw, but I feel this critique was lazy. I'm not in the camp that believes this is the greatest game ever, but I disagree with many of your points. For instance, how do you know Joel and Ellie got away with anything? Joel is this bitter, unhappy character who is at odds with the law before and during the game: it seems to me he is paying for his prior and current actions. At the end, he lies to Ellie, and she does not believe him. Do you believe he will live happily ever after with her after that? Doubtful. As for Ellie, what is there for her to get away with? I can't think of any wrong doing on her part other than stabbing a soldier in the leg outside of the city, and that was arguably in self defense since infected gets dead on the spot. All of the other killing was done in self defense with the exception of the fireflies which was supposed to characterize Joel (protip: he's a shitty person).

The amount of mad going on is kind of astounding.

I hate to pull this old line out, but how new are you people?
This is what Yahtzee DOES. He finds the bad in games. Also, just because YOU are fine playing a protagonist that's a complete bastard, that doesn't mean everyone is. I for one despise playing protagonists I can't empathize with. In a movie, ok maybe, but in a game, it just makes me WANT to fail. It makes me want to stop playing so these cunts can't reach their goal.

So come on. Stop getting mad at a Yahtzee review. Not only are you mostly bringing up entirely opinion based things, it's completely pointless anyway.

Legion:
The only part I agree with is the problem with the enemies all ignoring Ellie. In stealth situations having her happily run around and Clickers not even noticing was a little jarring.

The smoke bomb part I agree that they are useless, but not because they are not necessary, it's just that they don't seem to work properly. The enemy never stopped firing at me when I threw them either when it was at their feet or at mine.

The rest of it I couldn't agree with less. It seemed like complaining for the sake of it and/or deliberately missing the point.

If all Yahtzee does is nitpick, it means it's is a relatively positive review.

If the game was bad, he would have ripped it to tiny little pieces.

A1:
[

Historyism:
[

I know that "tropes" says after the apocalypse goes down everyone starts there kill rampage
Don't mind that can be a bit of fun.

What i object to is people taking that Trope. Declaring it true and trying to tell a heart breaking lord of the flies style storey based around it
Because it's not true.
Humas have three basic need food, water & shelter. If you are in a hostile environment full of zombies then shelter is hard to find alone

so you form groups, no one want to be kicked out of the group and everyone benefits from being in the group.

No one wants to risk death assisted with gang warfare when there are so many zombies about so groups interact peacefully.

we evolved to be nice as a survival strategy. same for evolving to not wanting to kill our fellow man.

The less fights you get in the longer you live: Fact!

If you want to imagine a world where apocalypse makes everyone a murder go for it
but don't use your headcanon to make teach me a moral lesson

With all the grim gritty seriousness of what I hesitate to call a game, I was expecting this to be another SO"TL review.

LuisGuimaraes:

Merklyn236:
Another great review Yahtzee, thank you.

Thank you for also calling out the biggest problem with the "zombie apocalypse" setting - that human life you'd think would be treated as something more precious in such a scenario. What was the line that President Roslin had in the BSG movie/series start? "The only way for us to survive is to start having babies." Nah, 6+ Billion people have all been wiped out, humankind is in serious jeapordy of being extinct, and the first thing we need to do is still killing each other because "reasons."

No more zombie games for me thanks.

Oh, that's exactly what I hate in scripted games: the fact that all characters are retarded, and you have to play retarded because you're not yourself, you're roleplaying dumb people so you have to do dumb stuff.

That's my problem with this game. I haven't played it myself, but watched it a at a friend's house, and holy FUCK is it depressing. It's supposed to show complex characters in a morally gray setting, but everyone's just a miserable bellend or psychopath. I hate any story that goes that way, no matter the medium, where the central message is "HEY HUMANITY! YOU ALL SUCK!!!" As low as my opinion is of the greater population, I do believe in our ability to change for the better. This just adds to my suspicion of game developers throwing in the message to their players that we are awful sacks of shit with no other counterpoint.
Also, remind me what the Fireflys are supposed to do? Are they pro- or anti-zom... I mean "infected?"

Yuuki:
Wait, if Ellie is of bugger-all use in gameplay and essentially invisible to zombies then why is she even there?

So the devs could stick a female character on the front cover to score an easy win with the "moar female protagonists!" parade?

See, that's just him using a flawed argument. The reason she is there is because the story revolves around the two of them, so for her to not be there at all it'd be extremely odd.

She may not have a whole lot of game-play influence, but she is vital to the story, so I don't see it as them using it as a female protagonist angle.

Darth_Payn:

That's my problem with this game. I haven't played it myself, but watched it a at a friend's house, and holy FUCK is it depressing. It's supposed to show complex characters in a morally gray setting, but everyone's just a miserable bellend or psychopath. I hate any story that goes that way, no matter the medium, where the central message is "HEY HUMANITY! YOU ALL SUCK!!!" As low as my opinion is of the greater population, I do believe in our ability to change for the better. This just adds to my suspicion of game developers throwing in the message to their players that we are awful sacks of shit with no other counterpoint.
Also, remind me what the Fireflys are supposed to do? Are they pro- or anti-zom... I mean "infected?"

People do have the opportunity to be good. But most people don't have to fight for their lives every day. The kind of places where people do tend to be places with a significantly higher murder rate than most others. So on a global scale the idea that people would all band together and live in harmony is absurd.

It's not even about people being bad. It's about people essentially being animals, and self preservation is one of the strongest instincts for all living creatures. If a being is put in a situation where their life is constantly in danger then they adapt to that situation. Some do it by isolating and protecting themselves and others actively seek to eliminate possible threats.

It's not about "good" or "bad".

IronMit:
The 'What' is predictable but the 'how' & 'why' is executed well

The part about not liking Joel....That was the point. What all the survivors do to survive is supposed to be in question, whereas in Uncharted it was not a theme. For example (spoiler) the cannibal/rapist/pedo guy mirrored Joel. Ellie calls him an animal just as she goes down on all fours and scoffs up the grub. All this stuff was intentional. Tess and Joel argue about weather they are good people or not.
Everyone being selfish murdering a-hole was addressed.

random analogy:
It's like complaining about the Dark Knight because Batman doesn't just kill Joker when that's what half the movie is about. It's a weak criticism unless you are criticising the execution or believability of it , unlike let's say the 'Man of Steel', when 100,000 people die and it's not really addressed.

There are a few reasons to dislike this game but the main criticism here is way off mark. Especially coming from someone that liked spec ops the line.

Spec ops the line and Last of us are so far the most powerful character driven stories I have experienced.
(Before you mention it, stuff like portal, Bioshock etc are stories with a silent protagonist, walking dead is more role play)

I agree, I felt like he was trying to miss the point of alot of those things that made it such a great story.

Mick P.:

That's not true at all. You might call your mother mom. But you'd call any one elses' mother a zombie. You might try to call them "infected" but then you'd realize after a few breaths that maybe you've been infected, because you are speaking in a weird language that would only be allowed in a badly written video game. And then you'd try to come up with something other than zombie to say to your buddy when one of the zombies is sneaking up on him from behind. But you'd give up after you realize that every other word is equally ill fit and blurt out ZOMBIE.

And you'd never be able to shake the feeling that just maybe you've become a zombie. Because only a zombie would be so braindead as to not call a zombie a zombie. Bad games 101.

I've no idea why you think this. Zombies are the LIVING DEAD. The Infected are not zombies and in real life I would not connect the two because I think of zombies as monsters from horror films that eat human flesh and come back from the dead. I do not think zombies are sick people.

Casual Shinji:
Well then, who criticizes the critics?

Whoever wants to. I mostly find it funny that people only have an issue with Yahtzee being "lazy" or "teh bias" when it comes to games they like. In fact, more than a few of these same people seem to be more than happy to join in with Yahtzee if they don't like the game.

The whole "You're not allowed to criticize, because you don't agree" line then basically means we're never allowed to call critics out on anything, ever.

It's also irrelevant here. Perhaps you're attempting to attack a strawman, I don't know.

Since my comment actually had to do with the quality of his job being reliant on whether or not one agrees with him, I am addressing a completely different point. Even if there is an issue of clarity, you have no real foundation to assume that specific line.

Darth_Payn:

That's my problem with this game. I haven't played it myself, but watched it a at a friend's house, and holy FUCK is it depressing. It's supposed to show complex characters in a morally gray setting, but everyone's just a miserable bellend or psychopath. I hate any story that goes that way, no matter the medium, where the central message is "HEY HUMANITY! YOU ALL SUCK!!!" As low as my opinion is of the greater population, I do believe in our ability to change for the better. This just adds to my suspicion of game developers throwing in the message to their players that we are awful sacks of shit with no other counterpoint.
Also, remind me what the Fireflys are supposed to do? Are they pro- or anti-zom... I mean "infected?"

That isn't the central message of the game at all. The central message is about how good people are. The Last of Us is about the few last good people. In the end when Joel saves Ellie he thinks he is saving humanity by saving the last good thing in the world.

After having played through the game several times I've noticed that on survivor difficulty you can in fact punch a clicker to death.

Smoke bombs are really useful in certain situations, I only needed them in two though. Right at the last door you need to open that enemies are guarding, and to sneak by the bloater in the hotel basement on survivor because I didn't have enough supplies to dent it's armour.

Most enemies in the game actually attack first; though you have no real reason to kill the military until chapter three. It is always justified to kill the infected no matter what,they are dicks. When you first meet the hunters they are attempting to kill you and steal your stuff; when you meet David's men they are trying to kill and eat you.

The worst Ellie ever did was brutally murder a psycho, there really wasn't all that much to "get away with." The characters where actually very human because they weren't perfect. They could get hurt and make mistakes.

Yes the AI not noticing your partners can be a little jarring but on anything above normal it's a god send.

For a point that is not based on the game; DO NOT DAMN FROM IGNORANCE. Mick P. You say you don't own the game and then damn it anyway for reasons that do not apply in chapter or past chapter two. The only time you are the aggressor is in chapter two. In chapter 9 you attack a village of people after they attack you, cripple you, kidnap Ellie, and attempt to kill and eat her. That's not being an aggressor

Zachary Amaranth:

Whoever wants to. I mostly find it funny that people only have an issue with Yahtzee being "lazy" or "teh bias" when it comes to games they like. In fact, more than a few of these same people seem to be more than happy to join in with Yahtzee if they don't like the game.

I think the reason the comments are mostly negative is because it wasn't a good summary of the game and a lot of them like me assumed he would talk about the story. He has talked a lot about silent protagonists, just using crappy exposition to tell stories, using idle chatter to build characters, games just throwing characters at us and expecting us to care, bad dialogue in games, using gameplay to tell the story and the proper way to make horror survival game. He even has article recently about stealth games giving us non-violent solutions and he fawned over the storytelling technique of Spec Ops and clearly he appreciated The Walking Dead.

So here we have a game that encourages non-violent stealth, that clearly understands how to implement survival horror and can tell a story very well using techniques he has discussed and what do we get? "Naughty Dog sucks and uh... it's just a generic action adventure like Uncharted".

Sometimes your knife gets stuck in someone. That's why the chronic knife fighters carry several on their person.

gjkbgt:

A1:
[

Historyism:
[

I know that "tropes" says after the apocalypse goes down everyone starts there kill rampage
Don't mind that can be a bit of fun.

What i object to is people taking that Trope. Declaring it true and trying to tell a heart breaking lord of the flies style storey based around it
Because it's not true.
Humas have three basic need food, water & shelter. If you are in a hostile environment full of zombies then shelter is hard to find alone

so you form groups, no one want to be kicked out of the group and everyone benefits from being in the group.

No one wants to risk death assisted with gang warfare when there are so many zombies about so groups interact peacefully.

we evolved to be nice as a survival strategy. same for evolving to not wanting to kill our fellow man.

The less fights you get in the longer you live: Fact!

If you want to imagine a world where apocalypse makes everyone a murder go for it
but don't use your headcanon to make teach me a moral lesson

Let me offer a counterpoint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

Even if you just look at the last 20 years (and this is just for the United States), you will see plenty of instances where people behave like animals just because they can. The 1991 Washington DC riots, the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles in 1992, the 2001 Cincinnati riots, the looting and unrest after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, two riots in consecutive years in LA after the Lakers win the NBA championship, all of these involved a large amount of people commiting crimes for no real purpose. The supposed cause of some is to "protest" some court decision or similar, but tell me how burning down buildings, robbing and looting from stores, and harming people who have nothing to do with the court decision count as protesting?

No, these and many of the other examples listed in the link acted this way because they were completely selfish and they felt they could get away with it. Even the various Occupy movements on Wall Street had numerous instances of theft and sexual assault because there are people who feel they can take what they want no matter what. And none of these situations involved some great calamity facing humanity as a whole such as the Cordyceps fungus in TLOU and other post-apocalyptic games/movies.

The people who have morals and cannot take a life are the ones who will die out first as the animals above take everything they can from them for themselves. Unless you are willing to fight with everything you have to survive, you won't make it. So, if defending oneself against senseless acts of violence would make me a murderer, then so be it, but I'm not just going to lay down and die.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here